Subject: Re: Cygnus Cygwin32 Press Release 1/21/97
From: [email-masked] (Kim Knuttila)

14 Feb 1997 15:10:19 -0800
Approved: [email-masked]
Distribution: cygnus
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Reply-To: [email-masked]
Original-To: [email-masked]
Original-CC: [email-masked], [email-masked]
In-reply-to: <[email-masked]> (message from Jim Balter on Thu, 13
	Feb 1997 15: 49:00 -0800)
Original-Sender: [email-masked]

   Date: Thu, 13 Feb 1997 15:49:00 -0800
   From: Jim Balter <[email-masked]>
   Organization: JQB Enterprises
   X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01Gold (WinNT; I)
   MIME-Version: 1.0
   CC: [email-masked]
   References: <[email-masked]>
   Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
   Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
   Sender: [email-masked]
   Precedence: bulk

   Geoffrey Noer wrote:

   > For the record, before we accept any significant changes to the library, we
   > have to get a form which assigns the copyright ownership to Cygnus.  If I
   > remember correctly, it leaves the writer with quite a few rights with
   > respect to always being able to use the code for their own purposes, but
   > guarantees that Cygnus can modify it and won't be sued for using it.
   > Since Cygnus becomes the owner of the code, we can and will sell it under a
   > proprietary license.  (Let me know if you want a copy).

   Yes, I'd like a copy.

   > If you cannot stand the thought of Cygnus making money from companies
   > who want to use the library in non-free software, you are always free to
   > maintain and distribute your own version of the GPL'd sources but I hope
   > you will choose to contribute the changes.

   The issue is that Cygnus and their customers are the *only* ones who can
   use my patches in a proprietary fashion.  I am reluctant to give up
   my ownership under those circumstances. 

Don't do it then. (No, I'm not kidding.) At the very least, you shouldn't if
the scale of your contribution is commercially interesting in its own right.
You certainly want to make sure that your contribution is meeting some 
objective of yours, whether it's commercial or whatever.

   > Certainly much of the code could use some rewriting.  Certainly there's
   > still a lot of work to be done with respect to completeness.  If marketing
   > folks are right and Cygnus makes money off the library, we engineers will
   > be able to spend more time on making things better.

   I just want to point out that this turns Cygnus into a pretty ordinary
   commercial developer. 

"pretty ordinary" is a relative thing. I've worked for a couple of "pretty
ordinary" ones, and this one ain't much like 'em. It's partly why I'm here.
Check the ChangeLog entries (my favorite -- gcc/g++/gdb of course :-). Look 
for companies that have contributed more than Cygnus. Mail their names to me. 
(or publish them here. I don't care which)

And we're just getting started. Yeh, I can't tell all, but the plans are
pretty cool, and the gpl'd software generated will be pretty cool too.

(Aside: gcc/gdb hackers send your resume's in!)

My bet is there isn't another company on the _planet_ that contributes 
the way we do. I'm starting to think "pretty ordinary" is badge material...
 
                         In the ideal "free software" world, all software
   is free and programmers can share their tools.  In the real
   world, the FSF realized that many companies are not willing to make
   their software free, so for programmers to be able to use others'
   tools, they had to be given the right (under the LGPL) to use those
   tools to build proprietary software.  Cygnus is now saying that, to use
   their tools (to build proprietary software, which is what most
   programmers do for a living), they must pay Cygnus to do so.  Cygnus is
   now saying that because Cygnus policy is now driven by "marketing
   folks".  A fact of life, perhaps, but a deviation from the FSF's
   premise and Cygnus' origins.

Yep. One way or another, we all march to marketing folks. Sometimes it's
official. Sometimes it's implied. Cygnus has _always_ marched to marketing
folks of one kind or another. So what. Make no mistake about it. Cygnus is 
a commercial enterprise. We are out to make money on this stuff. We have to 
pay the rent on our building. We have to pay programmer salaries, and all 
the other stuff of commerce. And we will contribute more to free software 
than anyone. Cygnus will continue to direct a substantial amount of money 
and effort into the production of gpl'd software. The targetted products 
include the compiler tools family (near and dear to my heart), including 
gcc, g++, gdb, cygwin32, and others. (For what it's worth, our marketing 
people are pretty cool too. Also a nice change, but we shouldn't tell 'em :-)

(Somehow, I just know I'm gonna hate myself for wading into this one...)

--krk.

-- 
Kim Knuttila     | Speaking for himself as always.
Cygnus Solutions |		Woof.
-
For help on using this list, send a message to
"[email-masked]" with one line of text: "help".